A few years ago, I was invited to present a paper on a panel titled “Teaching for the Post-Anthropocene.” At the time, I was an English teacher, at a high school in England. I was unfamiliar with the word “Anthropocene” and so started an educational journey that took me to the heart of the matter – an understanding of the root causes of environmental decline. My primary sources were Lovelock’s Gaia hypothesis, Deep Ecological thought from Arne Naess and Joanna Macy, and the works of Gregory Bateson and Fritjof Capra. These writings, among others, helped me understand that all life on Earth is interconnected and interdependent. Addressing the matter of environmental decline abstractly, in a reductionist way, is thinking about the wicked problem at the same level of consciousness that created it. It is not enough to recycle or change lightbulbs, as Leonardo Di Caprio, the UN Ambassador of Peace for Climate Change, demonstrates in his documentary Before the Flood that what is needed is a shift in perspective – shift in the way we view the world and our place in relation to it.

Fundamentally, the problem of environmental decline is a malady of tension – between the self, society, and nature. Over time, when one begins living in a more connected way, developing intimacy with nature, a deep reverence for life and an awareness of the spirit emerges. The environment’s decline is a sign that modernity is suffering from a crisis of spirituality. Despite the urgency with which humans need to reconnect with nature and the spirit, I believe it is important for a person to discover and find the deep mysteries of life on their own. With guidance, yes – but each of us must relate to, and discover, the world, personally. Becoming connected to and aware of nature highlights the role of the educator in the post-Anthropocene paradigm.

Before diving into the educational offer of this new paradigm, which Thomas Berry calls the Ecozoic era – “the geological era earth is entering when humans live in a mutually enhancing relationship with Earth and the Earth community” – we need to touch briefly on the elements within the present education systems, across the world, that have fed the existence of the Anthropocene.

Through the lens of Paolo Freire, we understand formal, mainstream education is oppressive. It is dehumanizing and moulds people into consumers and workers. Education systems all over the world value academic intelligences (Gardner) over all others. These intelligences are favoured because they serve the economic values the system upholds. These values define what education offers, as well as the way one sees the world and their relationship to it. Education presently preserves patho-adolescence, which few move on from in adult life. This is a term that will be discussed later in this article.

The contemporary education system also perpetuates “The Old Story” – the story of separation. This story divorces humans from nature and the world by “othering” and commodifying it. The world becomes an empty place, devoid of spirit. And the kosmos – a term revived from the Greeks by Von Humboldt to describe the interconnection of all in the universe – becomes a dark, empty void. Because humans are educated and socialized into these values and perspectives, it is understandable that many see the world as a place absent of soul, and they do not recognize or understand the responsibility of guardianship that comes with living life as a human being. Viktor Frankl says, “with great freedom comes great responsibility.” Because many adults are unable to recognise their responsibility to life, is it fair to ask, are we really free? Or are we just poorly educated?

Regenerative education supports the emergence of healthy adults. From the ecozoic perspective, this adult is one “who understands why he is here on Earth, why he was born, and is offering his unique contribution to the more-than-human world” (Plotkin). The soul-centred adult is one who lives with a sense of belonging to the Earth community, and who works with nature and lives with a sense of reverence towards it.

This adult has shifted perception and no longer lives with an Anthropocentric/human-centered worldview. Rather, the adult that emerges lives with an eco/soul-centered sense of belonging. This means one recognises one’s self as being a part of the web of life. One has embodied understanding, that each living being has significance and contributes to the whole in its own unique way. This shift is extremely empowering, because it enables a person to understand and recognize that we are all irreplaceable; that we all carry and hold a gift that no one else can offer to the Earth community. When one begins to live from that gift and shares it with the community of life, the Earth becomes a little more complete.

John Seed, an environmental activist, makes the point clearly. He experienced the shift in his perception while protecting some native rainforest in Australia. He said,

‘I am protecting the rainforest” develops to “I am part of the rain-forest protecting myself. I am that part of the rainforest recently emerged into thinking.’ What a relief then! The thousands of years of imagined separation are over and we begin to recall our true nature. That is, the change is a spiritual one.

When one’s perspective shifts to that of belonging and place, the choices one makes, the values one lives by, and the attitudes one has towards life and one’s self, shift, too. It is this shift that regenerative education serves.

When planning for regenerative education, two points of focus emerge. The first is the support and guidance given to the person as they progress through life, and the second is culture repair – co-creating regenerative culture. If the culture of the place one learns in is not regenerative – that is, connecting the self, society, and nature – and is not conducive to the peace growing from these connections, then growth, flourishing, and individuation are inhibited. The individual needs a healthy, life-enhancing environment to be in, and to thrive, the environment needs a collection of connected people.

The San bushmen, a nomadic hunter/gathering tribe that lives in the Kalahari Desert, offer comprehensive examples of what a connected way of life resembles, and they model how it is lived and shared through their culture. Through his 20+ years of research, Jon Young, an anthropologist and tracker, has come to believe the San people are some of the most connected people in the world. It is with their knowledge, and the knowledge of other wisdom traditions from around the world, that modernity can begin to relearn how to live in a connected way. The challenges come in finding ways to bridge ancient wisdom with modern attitudes and ways of life.

We, in the modern world, have forgotten what it takes to raise and develop healthy, connected human beings.

Jon Young believes there are 64 elements (512project.com) which comprise regenerative culture/culture repair. For these elements to exist, they need a defined social structure. Traditionally, this structure has been called “the village.” In a regenerated system of learning, it is the village that raises and educates the child. The process of education and support for the newborn begins from the moment of birth, if not before. Parents give love and support the independence of the youth to develop into self-reliant adulthood. Aunts and uncles facilitate the emergence of the child’s uniqueness, offering mentoring in ways parents cannot. Grandparents teach children what they need to know, offering healing and support from their wisdom and experience. Such social support is difficult to come by in modern settings and households, because a) the nuclear family rules; b) adults need to work to provide for their families; and c) there has been a breakdown in trust between adults and youth. Within the context of the village, a person has 25-30 people to share stories with. This is far greater than the access any modern human has to intimate and trusting social connection.

The biggest difference that is emerging between The Old Story and The New Story is abstraction/holism. Formal mainstream education judges a human being ready to learn from a curriculum at a set age – usually 4 – and ready to enter the world of work at the age of 18. In these 14 formative years, the person will have learnt enough about the world and acquired the necessary knowledge and competencies to go into the world with qualifications (hopefully) and begin working; or, they will continue learning at a university. The New Story understands education holistically and recognizes it is a shared, collective responsibility to support, mentor, and guide a child and adolescent into true adulthood. Each member of the village can give something unique to the child, enriching the learner’s understanding of their place and journey. The New Story asserts that learning is qualitative and is not time-bound. We all develop and grow in our own ways, at our own paces and rhythms. We each have our own gifts to bring into this world.  

Measuring learning quantitatively overlooks the psycho-social and psycho-spiritual development of a human being. Presently, students may graduate with grades (or not) and be judged ready to go into the world of adulthood, but psycho-spiritually, they may be stuck in patho-adolescence. This refers to a psycho-social stage in life, which many Westerners sleepwalk through. Bill Plotkin, a depth psychologist and the founder of the Animas Valley Institute, defines pathoadolesence as,

an egocentric existence focused upon the attempt to look good to others; to conform and/or to rebel against the ordinary and mainstream; to “get ahead” in the dog-eat-dog competition for material possessions, financial wealth, and social status; and to minimize the experience of challenging realities by way of addictions (whether to substances or to compulsive behaviors such as shopping, impersonal sex, or gambling).

Many remain stuck in the late adolescent psycho-social phase of development due to an absence of the village and an absence of rites of passage, which celebrate or confirm a life transition. Plotkin has refined the four life phases of childhood, adolescence, adulthood and elderhood into eight – that is, two stages per life phase. The model he has defined can be seen below. The life cycle begins and ends in the east and moves clockwise/earthwise around the circle.

This model is revelationary, because it looks at human development soul-centrically. It acknowledges and understands that every human being has a natural rhythm of unfolding and growth, which enables each person to live to the fullness of their potential… if the life-cycle is followed and supported. Each phase is defined by an archetype which speaks to and outlines the qualities, gifts, and tasks that each stage offers a person in their development. One is ready for a rite of passage when one has done the daily work of addressing and meeting the task of that specific developmental stage.

When a person experiences a shift in their center of gravity – observed in regenerative culture by elders and true adults – a rite of passage is orchestrated for the human to navigate and move through. Elders and true adults are able to identify the moments when a person is ready for a rite of passage, because they themselves have walked the path and have gone through the processes themselves. The competencies one needs to have in order to facilitate these learning and initiatory processes are completely different from the skillset of a teacher operating in a system of formal education. Comparing and analyzing the differences between “Mentors of Connection” and “Guides to the Soul” to “Teachers of Subjects” promises to be an insightful exploration of specific roles within regenerative education. However, this will need to be explored at a later time.

A question to ask, at this point is: how can the holistic support of the village be offered to a person living in the industrialized/industrializing worlds, allowing them to live in a healthy, connected way?

Over time, in the most developed parts of the world, I foresee increasing numbers of people moving away from cities, returning to the land and community/village life. This movement and transition of people can be seen as a shift towards neo-egalitarianism. It is not enough to move onto the land with good intentions and high ideals; one needs to understand what regenerative culture is, and, with this understanding, one needs to begin building the village and repairing culture. This is necessary, if one is to begin co-creating the life enhancing reality that is presently emerging across the world.

There are pockets of regenerative culture that exist already, yet we, as an industrialized/industrializing population, are a long way from realizing “local autonomy and decentralisation” (Naess). I believe the early adopters have already begun to make these transitions, yet the shift and tipping point will take longer than our lifetimes to occur. This invites the intergenerational perspective. The first peoples of North America practice the wisdom of thinking seven generations ahead. When we expand our thinking and consciousness to imagine intergenerational transition, it is possible to live with greater faith and hope, knowing that our lives are a part of something far greater than what we are living now. What we create with our lives, whilst we live, can continue to serve and be built upon by the generations who come after us.

Soulcentrism and Nature Connection are needed in today’s world and are central to a regenerative system of education: these methodologies support the emergence of human beings who are capable of leading and shaping the future of life on Earth. The soul-centered and connected adult is capable of being an artisan of cultural change. Such a person lives with the eight attributes of connection: inner happiness; vitality; a commitment to mentoring and paying it forward; empathy and respect for nature; being truly helpful with vision activated; having full awareness, full aliveness, love and forgiveness, and quiet mind; creativity; and presence. These are the qualities of true leadership, and it is these qualities that empower any person to lead and consciously contribute to The Great Turning, which Joanna Macy defines as “the essential adventure of our time. It involves the transition from a doomed economy of industrial growth to a life-sustaining society committed to the recovery of our world.”

The ruler’s time was fading away. He needed to train soldiers and workers and find more resources. He also had to make some donations to the neighboring villages, as he knew that the more they all helped one another, the more likely they would be to defend their territory. Jack was still happy because they had at least put up walls around the village, built barracks for people, and two camps for soldiers. He was spending four or five hours checking the village every day, because he knew the ruler had to take care of his home. Suddenly, he heard the voice coming from the old and loyal tower. It was telling news of the war. Jack gathered all his soldiers because he was the only one to command them. Strategy was so important, because bad planning would mean the end of all the villages. After a brave speech, they started to march. All the soldiers’ attention was directed to Jack, waiting for his commands.

But suddenly, Jack lost all his soldiers. He was mad and ran away from his room to check the router and saw that there was no internet connection. What was he going to do now? Jack sighed. He supposed he would do homework instead. Exams were getting closer; all his enthusiasm faded away.

It does not matter what age you are, most people find it difficult to concentrate on the task they are required to do. There are books, seminars and many activities to motivate people to finish their work. These all show that we face an important problem with handling our responsibilities.

This is also one of the key issues in education. Much research has focused on how to improve the engagement and motivation of young people towards their school work. As you have probably heard, it’s almost a cliché that most parents complain about young people’s irresponsibility regarding school work and work around the home. While this has been a problem standing in front of us for a while now, we must ask: what makes these kinds of distracting video games so appealing?

The story told above is happening every day. That video game has been downloaded more than 50 million times and is being played every day by millions of people of various ages. The first time I had heard of this game was when I conducted interviews with children using a tablet PC in school. Although my focus of the research was not about mobile games, this was brought up when I wanted to make informal conversation before initiating the interview. One boy was so enthusiastic when we started to talk about this game, that he mentioned he would stop playing the game, go to sleep, but set his alarm for five hours later – his worker would have finished the task he’d been assigned, and the boy would wake up to assign a new task Not finishing such a task would mean lagging behind his peers, for his village would not develop.

I asked him, “what is so nice about this game? You are just building and upgrading buildings and fighting against others.”

The answer was, “I don’t know; it is just fun.”

I also installed the game. I had played it for two months until I woke up at 3 a.m. with a notification. One of my workers had finished his work and I assigned him another task. Then I tried to sleep. I opened my eyes again after a couple of seconds and saw my wife’s shocked eyes. She could not believe I woke up just for this. It was the last time I played the game. But the question was still in my mind: how could we trigger our sense of responsibility by exemplifying the methods of the game in real life?

We – people in education, parents – spend a considerable amount of time and resources to nurture children in a manner so that they become aware of their responsibilities. However, schools, teachers, homework, etc. are seen as boring and something to be escaped by most children.

Gamification is a trendy jargon nowadays. It aims at transforming real life context in a manner that adopts game thinking in online platforms. From this perspective, it proposes to increase motivation, engagement, sense of enjoyment, and the positive attitudes of people towards work (Huanng and Soman, 2013). While there is much research in the sector of business, gamification is also widely recognized in education. The educational purpose of gamification is that instead of blunting the way children best learn, the way they enjoy to learn should be adapted in an educational context. This is not a new idea, as this was also expressed in other contexts. For example, Said Nursi touches on a crucial point:

One reason why preachers’ advice is ineffective nowadays is that they invite people to change their nature. They advise: “Do not be envious or ambitious, do not feel enmity or be obstinate, do not love the world,” and so on. Such advice is useless, for it is against human nature. Instead, these energies can and should be channeled into good deeds and directed toward positive aims. (The Ninth Letter, p. 53)

If we want to apply this method in education, the first thing we should consider is what children like and enjoy most. Obviously, many of them enjoy playing games and any advice like, “Don’t play games! Don’t laugh during the lesson! Don’t spend time in front of the computer! Be quiet in class!” will be counter-productive. As in Said Nursi’s statement, this is asking the impossible from a child who is created to learn in an environment that offers play, social interaction, and competition.

Jean Piaget is a well-known theorist about play and the cognitive development of children. He emphasizes the importance of play and its contribution to healthy development of children (Sutton-Smith, 1983). Vygotsky (1967) also underlines social play and peer interaction in child development. However, while Vygotsky gives the example of a child who rides an imaginary horse with a stick, today’s children’s perception of play has changed and continues to change dramatically. Therefore, it should be understood how Jack’s and my sense of responsibility were piqued. While we both cognitively focused and spent a considerable amount of time on this game, we also enjoyed doing so.

From the perspectives above, the stimulating dynamics used in games could be transformed in a suitable manner into curriculum and the classroom environment could be redesigned. This can also be adapted into work environments, as in Google whose office buildings are colorful rather than plain, and there is even a slide for their workers to use instead of stairs. Their aim is to make the environment flexible so people in the firm do not perceive what they are doing as a work.

There is also educational technology that pays attention to gamification. ClassDojo is one of them. It is a simple but effective idea to attract student’s attention and change their behavior. Each student chooses an avatar that looks like a small monster and the teacher assesses various things on behalf of the students’ avatars. Teachers can give immediate feedback to students. For example, when a student shows a negative behavior in class or solves a question, students will see the changes in his/her ClassDojo app on their mobile device. The children I interviewed showed great enthusiasm about this application and interestingly, they perceive this application as a game, although the only differences between this application and normal assessment sheets were the avatars and the template. Kahoot and Socrative are two other mobile applications that these students have experience with. These mobile applications are also perceived as joyful, competitive, and rich learning platforms.

While considering how to transfer the strategies of the game into the real life context, it should not be forgotten that there are parents and teachers who have serious reservations about games, as some of their children are addicted to these kinds of games. They are right to have these doubts and I do not think games are absolutely innocent. In fact, most strategy games, including the one that me and Jack became addicted to, have many negative messages, from stealing to killing people. But when it is impossible to avoid them completely, it is best to focus on the positive themes and actualize them for productive outcomes in schools and family life.

All in all, I am still thinking about the situation of my village and neighborhoods. The rulers of neighboring villages were sad and angry when I said that I was leaving: “Winter” was getting closer and they needed my donations and the soldiers I trained. I am now consoling myself as my wife, who is a child psychologist, assigned me to do cleaning and made me think of all the bacteria as my enemies and a big threat to our lovely village (home). As parents and educators, it is our duty to discover the way your children and students learn and produce your own real games.

Ahmet Tugra is a PhD candidate in the department of Learning, Technology and Education in the UK.

As citizens of this macro-reality, we can often feel as if we are but pawns in the vast global chess game being played by multinational corporations, traditional superpowers, new and emerging nuclear powers, and the economic pushbuttons of development and consumer capitalism. Within such a world, some may find it difficult to believe that our individual choices can make a difference in our communities. So what if a few dozen or even a few hundred people in our city get together for an interfaith meal? So what if families from different cultures living together in a town get to know each other? What difference does it make in the end? Political powers and other forces call the larger shots and will send us all into war and conflict if they so desire. Human nature being what it is, we will succumb to our baser instincts in hard times no matter how many positive interfaith or intercultural experiences we’ve had with others.

Critics of interfaith dialogue often make this case. They point to examples from Bosnia, the Middle East, Kashmir, Punjab, Rwanda and elsewhere to illustrate that people who coexist peacefully for centuries can be manipulated into barbarically killing each other relatively quickly. Tyrants, insurgents and other power-seekers have learned that cultural, ethnic, and/or religious differences can form natural fault lines in a given communal fabric, which can be exploited by skillful media messaging and the opportunistic staging of current events into powerfully persuasive political theater. Once the mass media have been harnessed, if not outright hijacked, power seekers can move populations as if mountains – whipping up mass fear, anger, hysteria and eventually an appetite for genocide.

Interfaith dialogue seems no match for these gargantuan modern monstrosities. And, in many cases, it isn’t. The warmly felt bonds of interfaith harmony that thrive in times of relative peace and prosperity chill easily in times of strife and hardship, especially when political, economic or national security interests are at stake. In such times, usually all but a few individuals will succumb to fear, and then retreat to their respective religio-ethnic corners to prepare for a fight. The individuals who maintain their commitment to peaceful coexistence with their neighbors resist the fight, try to save their friends who have suddenly become “the enemy” because of their religion or ethnicity, and often lose their lives in the process. They may be heroes, to be sure, but they are dead. And they do not win in the end; the warmongers do – at least, most of the time.

But not all the time. Occasionally, we find exceptions to this all too common trajectory in human socio-political relations. Situations wherein populations held themselves together despite enormous pressures to fight and kill one another. Where community leaders resisted the gravitational pull of hatred that strips them of their voices and replaces them with those of fear mongers and peddlers of hatred. When we find these exceptions, we must review and analyze the exact conditions that made them possible in the first place, and determine if they can be replicated in other situations of strife and war.

I encountered such an exceptional situation this past spring while visiting Croatia. Fuzine is one of several quaint mountain villages in the district of Gorski Kotar in northern end of the Dalmatian coast of Croatia. I recently listened to the former governor of the district and a local radio producer tell their stories from the period of the war in 1991.

A Yugoslavian Army base camp was built near the district, on top of a hill. Normally, the existence of this base would have been the beginning of the end for peaceful relations between the Croat and Serbian villages of the district. Croats would view the base as a danger and a provocation, as well as a support camp to the Serbian villages. The Serbians, for their part, would have used the base as a “back-up” for their own violence against their Croat neighbors. Since violence begets violence, Croats or Serbs would make the first strike and the cycle would begin. Many would die, the villages would be destroyed, and the resulting “life” would resemble existence on the surface of the moon.

That’s not what happened.

In a stunning turn of events, the municipal leaders of all the villages – Serb and Croat – approached the base commanders and established a relationship with them. After several meetings, it became clear that none of them wanted either to shoot at each other or to be shot. So, they made a written agreement that constituted the “terms” of their coexistence during those months. For example, when the Yugoslav army was required to fire on the villages, per orders from up the chain of command, they warned the citizens ahead of time and instructed them on how to survive the barrage. They provided the citizens with maps of the mines they laid. The village leaders returned the favor and provided base commanders with a “heads up” when they were forced, by public opinion and the radical fringe, to fire on the army base. The local radio producer treated the army base as another “village” in the district and reported its news, events, and played music for the troops, etc. They called the families of wounded guards to apologize – and did so publicly on the radio – when radical elements in their midst broke the agreement and fired on the soldiers. Media reports stayed ahead of the rumor mills, reported the facts of things, and controlled the message to minimize the inflammatory impact of the angry rhetoric coming from other sources.

As a result of the extraordinary bravery and commitment from people on both sides, no one from the district was killed and no one was taken to a wartime prison camp.

Leaders on both sides suffered consequences. Two of the base commanders went to prison for 12 years. One of them disappeared into the mists of “the system” while the other was killed by civilians after being released. The radio producer in Gorski Kotar was banned from media and only recently has begun to work again. Other city leaders voluntarily disappeared into anonymity – this story was kept quiet at first – so as to avoid persecution and death for their actions.

Upon analysis, a few things stand out about this exceptional situation. First of all, there were conditions on the ground that the village leaders exploited to their advantage. The Gorski Kotar district was somewhat geographically remote from the heart of the fighting during the war. As such, neither the base nor the villagers had direct daily involvement in the heart of the war’s operations. Without interventions for peace that could have certainly changed, and the district could have become an additional center or “theater” of the war; however, the interventions took advantage of the district’s “off the beaten path” status. An additional opportunity came in the fact that one of the base commanders was nearing retirement, weary of his job and of fighting, and was inclined to strike a deal with the villagers as long as he could save face. Therefore, when village leaders approached him and his colleagues with a plan for peaceful coexistence, they were ready to negotiate a plan that would let both sides fly under the radar of the larger war and possibly come away from it largely unscathed.

Secondly, media leaders took their share of responsibility for the creation and maintenance of the arrangement with the base camp, as well as for keeping the peace between the villages during particularly tense weeks. Put simply, radio and print media controlled the message in favor of peace. When infractions to the agreement happened from time to time, from both sides, reporting of the story was done in the least inflammatory way possible. For example, when the base camp did an obligatory firing on the villages (after warning the villagers of the times and locations) and accidentally damaged the radio transmission tower, the base commander sent his own soldiers to repair it immediately so that broadcasts could resume as soon as possible. More importantly, this fact was reported to the community so as to minimize anger and outrage over the incident. In short, media operatives used their power for peace and not for war. They recognized the power of media to incite, enflame, and create the larger narrative in which people experience things in their communities. Through skillful messaging and the coordination of communication lines, they maintained and nurtured the agreement for peace through its many months, creating the very conditions for peaceful coexistence.

Finally, we can see that community leaders in the villages refused to relinquish immediately their roles as leaders to the larger forces of the army. They easily could have done otherwise. Once the base camp was established, they could have decided that war was now inevitable, that their little villages stood no chance to resist the war tide rolling towards them, and that each village needed to now begin fortifying themselves against the army and each other, and prepare to fight and die.

They didn’t do this. Instead, they banded together, created a plan, and took a huge risk in walking up the hill to the base camp and presenting it to the commanders. The creativity, courage and will power this required of them simply cannot be overstated. In the end, this human element is what makes the ultimate difference. Human beings are endowed with self-consciousness, agency and imagination, which allows us to not only visualize alternative scenarios in any given situation, but also to imagine and implement alternative courses of action within them – for ourselves and for others. These leaders together resisted the war tide, created an alternative possibility for their district, and bravely took radical steps to implement it. And it worked. Not flawlessly, but enough to keep their people, their homes and their way of life from going up in flames.

Can what happened in Gorski Kotar work everywhere? No and yes. No, in the sense that certain conditions in place on the ground in this district that contributed to the peace are not in place ubiquitously. Most army base commanders aren’t open to illegal agreements with “enemy” villagers. Not all regional or district leaders – in the media or otherwise – have working relations good enough to band together in wartime to create and implement such a thing as this. Many other factors prevent any one exception, such as what happened in Gorski Kotar, from providing a stable template for peace easily applicable to any other situation. These situations are exceptions, after all.

Nevertheless, what happened here can be instructive for other areas. The positive and necessary role of media in maintaining the peace agreement in Gorski Kotar is abundantly clear. Those who find themselves in similar situations of religious and ethnic conflict will do well to procure access to media, if possible, sooner rather than later in order to shape the messaging toward peace and restraint, away from hatred and violence. Today’s 21st century media technology resists totalitarian control in important ways, as recent events in Iran, China and even North Korea indicate. Those with skills can exploit media for peace as well as for war.

Finally, in the end, much turns on the simple power of human agency and choice, and the willingness of people to join together and exercise that agency in the direction of peace in the face of seemingly impossible circumstances. Of course, such principled action plans don’t always make a difference. In fact, such plans may often fail in times of war. But, they certainly have no chance of success at all if people give up on the fight from the beginning and refuse even to attempt to alter the course of things. On this point, people on the brink of war in all sorts of situations have at least a chance – perhaps not a big chance, but a chance nevertheless – to turn the tide in another direction, or at least to reduce the body count and carnage.

I am haunted by an image one of the community leaders in Gorski Kotar used in telling us their story when we met with them. The radio producer told us that media flies “as fast as a bird, as fast as the speed of light” even; however, it typically arrives after the dead bodies already lay on the ground. The producer and the other leaders in the community wanted to avoid bodies on the ground altogether. They wanted media to be faster than the dead.

It seems, in this case at least, they succeeded.

B. Jill Carroll is an Adjunct Associate Professor in the Department of Religious Studies at Rice University.

“The first time you share tea with a Balti, you are a stranger, the second time you are an honored guest. The third time you become family, and for our families we are prepared to do anything, even die.”

This astonishing book is a nonfiction tale of those three cups of tea Greg Mortenson had with the people of Korphe, a remote village in Northern Pakistan. Co-written by acclaimed journalist David Oliver Relin, the 368 page long book met with enthusiastic acclaim, and since its publication in 2006 has sold more than 2.5 million copies in 29 languages. Moreover, in an official ceremony in March 23, 2009, Mortenson received Pakistan’s highest civilian award, the Sitara-i-Pakistan (The Star of Pakistan) for his courage and humanitarian effort to promote education for the last fifteen years.

Mortenson’s story begins in 1993, after a failed attempt to climb the world’s second highest peak, K2, to honor the memory of his younger sister Christa, who died from a massive seizure after a lifelong struggle with epilepsy. Alone, exhausted and emaciated, Mortenson wandered into the impoverished village of Korphe, where the villagers took him in and nursed him back to health. “They had very little but they gave me everything they had, and I was very touched by their hospitality” said Mortenson in an interview to CBS News .

While he was recuperating in Haji Ali’s – the chief of the village – home, he learned more and more about how people lived in this part of the world; that the nearest doctor lived a week’s walk away, most of the children suffered from malnutrition and one out of three children died before their first birthday. Mortenson felt he owed the people of the village, who had already begun to call him “Dr. Greg,” although he was a nurse. He thought at least he could get some supplies for Korphe’s school. Yet, taking him to an open land, Haji Ali explained that they didn’t have a school, and a teacher cost one dollar a day, which was more than the villagers could afford. Mortenson watched boys and girls kneeling on the frosty ground to write out their multiplication tables by scratching in the dirt with sticks. “I felt like my heart was being torn out. Can you imagine a fourth- grade class in America, alone, without a teacher, sitting there quietly and working on their lessons? I knew I had to do something,” Mortenson recounts in the book (p. 32). At that very moment, notes from Mortenson’s heart translated into a commitment. He put his hands on Haji Ali’s shoulder and said, “I will build a school here, I promise.”

Three Cups of Tea: One Man’s Mission to Promote Peace… One School at a Time traces Greg Mortenson’s efforts to fulfill this promise. Along the way, he encountered enormous obstacles. Upon his return to California, he sent 580 letters to celebrities asking for funds for the school, which yielded only one reply, a $100 check; he sold everything he owned, lived in a car to reduce his expenses and accepted donation in pennies from schoolchildren.
In spite of the challenges of raising funds, separation from his wife and newly born daughter, and an eight day kidnapping by the Taliban, Mortenson eventually succeeded in building the school. From his earnest promise grew Central Asia Institute, which built more than fifty schools in Pakistan and Afghanistan. “I see education least invested in, that can bring the most change” says Mortenson. In this respect, he is convinced that extremism and terror must be fought with books, not with bombs. He places particular emphasis on educating girls; their education, he believes, can affect the whole community. He gives the example of Jahan, the first educated woman in Skardu, who, after completing her studies in healthcare, could help reduce the mortality rate of women during pregnancy from about twenty a year to zero.

Along with recounting Greg Mortenson’s personal determination to build the school, the book also makes frequent mention of the villagers’ passion for education and their many sacrifices. In one instance, Haji Ali hands over twelve rams – half the wealth of the village – to Haji Mehdi, a mafia boss who ran the economy of the region and didn’t want the school built. “Don’t be sad,” Haji Ali told the shattered villagers. “Long after all those rams are dead and eaten this school will still stand. Haji Mehdi has food today, now, our children have education forever” (p. 153).

In another instance, he shows the Koran to Mortenson, and asks: “Do you see how beautiful this Koran is?”

“Yes” replies Mortenson.

“I can’t read it. This is the greatest sadness in my life. I will do anything so the children of my village never have to know this feeling. I will pay any price so they have the education they deserve.”

Mortenson’s story is uplifting in many ways. It is a story about “compassion in action, not talk” as Mortenson puts it. It is about taking notes when our hearts begin to speak and leaving our comfort zones to achieve what we deem right and necessary. In Brokaw’s words, his story is proof that “one ordinary person, with the right combination of character and determination, really can change the world.”

There are other stories of anonymous heroes all around world, who pack up their lives into a suitcase and move to remote places to turn stones into schools. Their stories are yet to be told.

Notes

1. http://www.threecupsoftea.com/greg-mortenson-bio-and-professional-photo
2. ttp://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/04/sunday/main4697362.shtml
3. http://www.threecupsoftea.com/2009/01/21/msnbc-jan2009/
4. http://www.blogs.targetx.com/wildriverreview/penworldvoices/2008/02/greg_motensons_mission_to_prom.html
5. Three cups of tea One Man’s Mission to Promote Peace… One School at a time, Greg Mortenson and david Oliver relin, 2006, Penguin Books, review of tom Brokaw.

“WE HAVE TO FACE THE FACT THAT EITHER ALL OF US ARE GOING TO DIE TOGETHER OR WE ARE GOING TO LEARN TO LIVE TOGETHER AND IF WE ARE TO LIVE TOGETHER THEN WE MUST TALK.”

The word “dialogue” derives from two roots: “dia,” which means “through,” and “logos,” which means “the word,” or more specifically, “the meaning of the word.” Thus the image one gets is of a river of meaning flowing around and through those who are participating in the dialogue.

Dialogue is one of the most effective means in the struggle against negative conditioning, prejudice, and fanaticism. But in order for any dialogue to be effective, certain qualities are needed: Sincerity, humility, and interest. Sincerity is needed because this is what moves the heart. Humility is needed because this is what makes one person value another. Interest is needed because it is the source of all questions.

In his book, Dialogue, the Art of Thinking, William Isaacs writes the following:

“Dialogue is altogether a very different way of talking. Generally, we think of dialogue as “better conversation,” but there is much more to it. Dialogue, as defined, is a conversation with a center, not sides. It is a way of taking the energy of our differences and channeling that energy toward something that has never been created before. It lifts us out of polarization and into a greater sense of the commonalty, and is thereby a means for accessing the intelligence and coordinated power of groups of people.”

Why dialogue?

Firstly, by engaging in dialogue with others we can reduce tensions, conflicts, and even wars.

It is known that through the ages, religious, cultural, and ethnic differences have led to misunderstanding, hostility, and conflict. The root of conflict is ignorance and ignorance is the source of prejudice. To get to know each other through dialogue is essential for the establishment of world peace.

Dialogue between a few people can produce great results. For example, Dr. Jim Miller started a form of dialogue with doctors in the Soviet Union in the 1970s. The doctors, in turn, influenced the leaders, who in turn, helped create change and worked toward ending the Cold War. Because of his work, Miller was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

Another such “unsung heroine” is peace activist Margaret Gibney, a 14 year-old from civil war-torn Northern Ireland, who helped create the Wall of Peace project in Belfast. Another is Kenyan ethnographer Sultan Sornjee, founder of the African Peace Museum in Nairobi, who encourages indigenous communities to share their traditions of peace. Miller, Gibney, Sornjee, and many other unsung heroes have faced adversity but have looked beyond cultural, social, economic, and racial issues to find a solution.

Secondly, in today’s world there are over 6,000 communities and as many distinct languages. The United States has a society that is made up of more than 260 ethnic backgrounds. Such differences naturally lead to a diversity of vision, values, beliefs, practices, and expression; all of these, naturally, deserve equal respect and dignity. Through dialogue, we can promote better understanding of and creative cooperation among cultures and religions, while acknowledging and accepting their differences.

Thirdly, technology has expedited globalization and made distant countries seem like neighboring towns. Progress in communication and transport technology during the 20th century has enabled us to overcome geographical boundaries and revolutionize our way of living. The world is now linked to such an extent that a local event cannot take place without having an impact on the international community and vice versa. The world has become like a village. But this village is very diverse and includes many cultures, faiths, and traditions. The tragedy of the tsunami reminded all people just how connected we are when we were all hurt by that disaster and rushed together to help, however we could.

I conclude with the words of several people who have changed history through dialogue.

Henry Wadsworth Longfellow cited the following Chinese proverb:

“A single conversation across the table with a wise man is better than ten years’ study of books.”

Ralph Waldo Emerson said:

“Conversation is the laboratory and workshop of the student.”

Eleanor Roosevelt once said:

“We have to face the fact that either all of us are going to die together or we are going to learn to live together and if we are to live together then we must talk.”

When 2001 was designated the year of dialogue by the U.N, Secretary General Kofi Annan said the following:

“I see … dialogue as a chance for people of different cultures and traditions to get to know each other better, whether they live on opposite sides of the world or on the same street.”

Fethullah Gulen, an important Muslim scholar from Turkey and an advocate for dialogue, a man whose words and deeds have inspired millions, including myself, into conducting dialogue, states:

“Civilized people solve their problems through dialogue.”

Once there was a man, a long time before, who killed ninety-nine people. One day he began to feel remorse for his actions, and he began to search for the most renowned scholar of the area. He was told that he should go to see a certain priest. When he went to the priest, he told him that he had killed ninety-nine people and asked whether his repentance would be accepted. When the priest said “No,” he killed the priest too. In this way, the number of murders he had committed increased to a hundred.

After this, he was again full of remorse and inquired who the greatest scholar of the time was. A prominent scholar was recommended to him. The man told the scholar that he had killed a hundred people and asked whether his repentance would be accepted. The scholar told him that (of course) he could repent, that no one had the right to stand between a person and his repentance, and told him to go to a certain place where people who worshipped God were living. He told him; “Worship God along with them. Don’t return to your village, because it is an evil place.”

The man set forth, yet he died halfway (through his journey). Upon his death, the angels of punishment and the angels of mercy disagreed about (what to do with) the man. The angels of mercy said: “this man has come here as penitent and has turned to God with his heart,” while the angels of punishment said: “He did not perform any good deeds.”

Meanwhile, an angel in human form appeared. The angels of mercy and the angels of punishment agreed that this angel should judge the disagreement.

The angel in human form said: “Measure the distance from both sides, and compare them. He will belong to whichever side he is closer to.” When they measured the distances and compared them, they saw that he was closer to his destination by the length of a hand, and the angels of mercy took him away.

According to another report, the last part of the hadith is as follows: “After God ordered the former village to recede, and the latter to come nearer, the angel in human form told them to measure the distance from both sides. When they did as they were told, they saw that he was closer to the village of good people by the length of a hand. In this way he was forgiven.

Speed, movement over distance in time, is as old as the universe; the sensation of speed was ‘experienced’ as soon as man was created and covered distances by walking. Man has ever since extended and advanced his power of movement until speed has reached its present, dizzying level and continues to increase. Man first ‘enjoyed’ speed through his feet, then on the back of domesticated beasts, then in carts and carriages, then bicycles and motor-driven vehicles. Today, man is on the verge of defeating, even annihilating, distances. The annihilation of distance is already a reality in the case of sound and image transmission by processes far ahead of the transportation of objects.

Speed has brought more ease and comfort, but has also had negative consequences. Whether the positive consequences outweigh the negative ones is still an open question, one we can only answer by balancing the technological advances against real and substantial gain in human happiness and in the meaningfulness of human life.

Buses, trains, ships and planes, running on some advanced form of electrical energy, or in the further future space-craft run on some form of pure light energy, will make it possible to cover huge distances in minutes. We will, at the same time, be able to press a button and receive sounds, images, colours, even smells, from long distances. As ‘time’ and ‘space’ are effectively reduced, the earth will really become a global village.

Human conquests over time and space are, as we have noted, set to go much further, bringing with them, in addition to many facilities, numerous problems. We are bound to admire advances in scientific research, new inventions and their application – all the wonders of civilization. However, need this prevent us from asking whether the dazzling speed – attained through man’s commitment to investigating every detail of the ‘book of the universe’ – has really served the nobler aims, those rather more important for human life than speed by itself. If, by subjugating time and space, by contracting the world into a village and reducing time costs to near zero, speed cannot reach the higher goals, does it really benefit mankind? If science, penetrating into the universe’s remotest corners for knowledge of the whole of existence, made the whole world as familiar as our own neighbourhood, uncovered everything in it, making it, as it were, naked, and did not do so for the sake of the higher human values, needs and desires, would it not be a kind of ignominy to use such a science – to be familiar with the secrets of an individual or a nation, and able to expose them?

Is speed an end in itself? That is, are inventions and developments in transportation and telecommunication made just to indulge a crazy, unreflecting addiction to doing things ever faster? It is doubtful if these sophisticated means of transportation and communication have led to any great advance in human values. We wish that they had, so that we might look forward to the peaceful co-existence of the world’s peoples in a world contracted to a village. But it is impossible to claim that the technologies of speed serve any such goal at present.

If we argue that speed is desired, not for its own sake, but for the service of mankind’s loftier goals, can we also argue that faster cars or trains or planes really contribute to the attainment of these goals? If they do, we can aim to contract time and space still further – to the very limits of science-fictional imagination. But it is difficult to give a positive answer to that question: the present applications of speed technology are far from achieving the desired goals.

If speed is meant to save time, to get things done faster or to reach somewhere faster, but the time saved, the things done or the destinations reached, are not part of some higher aim more important than speed, then what is all the effort for? If we have no general aim for our speed technology and no specific intention to realize this aim, then all our effort and the time saved will be in vain – like streams of water flowing nowhere, or rain falling on barren ground. Today, some proponents of speed, heedless of any general aims in life, are greatly impressed by a technology that allows one to leave the earth’s atmosphere in a few minutes, to carry sounds and images many thousands of kilometres almost instantaneously. They value only the speed, they evaluate only the technology, detached from its general consequences. However, speed is only a material phenomenon. Without specific goals it can be neither a foundation for progress and civilization nor a means to the realization of human values.While mankind found happiness in centuries when they travelled on foot or horseback, they have in this century, unfortunately, suffered from the most horrifying kinds of brutality despite very sophisticated technology.

Speed has never been the most urgent need of mankind. It was and is only a means to an end. A balanced view is important. Some have idolized speed and glorified technological advances, regarding these as everything; others, reacting against the uselessness of speed without purpose, have become hostile to modern mechanisms of transport or communication.

Speed should serve specific aims. It is to be welcomed and valued as long as it enables the realization of human values and human aims; as long as it brings peace and happiness and ends pangs of separation; as long as it contributes to the general harmony of the world and the solution of worldly and other-worldly problems; and as long as it advances scientific research and empowers scientific establishments. Without these benefits, speed in movement or communication is no more than a meaningless, insecure illusion.

It was 1927. The warm days of spring had arrived in the beautiful village of Bark. The fine weather brought visitors from distant lands. One special guest would enjoy the long tranquil summer. She would nest in a high chimney near the mosque and wake to the voice of the muezzin calling the faithful to prayer and then recite her own long ballad. The sounds echoed through the hills. There was a longing sound in her voice. After mating and giving birth, the majestic visitor would normally have returned to her homeland to maybe come back the following year

The stork’s hopes were as long as her thin legs and protracted beak. She was young and beautiful and attracted the eye of a strong and handsome male. After their wedding, held in the deep blue sky, they flew away to build a new life together. The protective male proudly and jealously looked after her. She made her nest and began to lay her eggs one by one. The male counted them every day and protected them carefully. They anxiously awaited their chicks. But something happened. A mischievous hand interfered with the eggs. It was not a child. It was a cunning adult. He examined the eggs, and chose the best one. He stared at it and laughed through his rusty teeth. Holding his hat so as not to lose it to the wind, he climbed down from the tree, his evil prank completed.

He rushed to the coffee house and began to boast about what he had done. He had replaced the stork egg with a duck egg. With a cigarette in one hand and the egg in the other he bragged: ‘I took this egg and put a duck egg in the nest. Soon, we will see flying ducks’.

He returned home and showed off the egg to his children. They looked at it in astonishment. He put some butter in a pan and prepared to fry it. It sizzled as it struck the hot metal. At that very moment, the heart of the mother sizzled as she was struck by a burning desire to return to her nest. Like the man, they too returned to their nest to look after their young. Unaware of what had happened, the male sang his beautiful song and eased the worries of his mate.

Waiting for a new life is not easy. The male stork flew away early in the morning, and after searching near and far would return with all sorts of delicacies for his wife. When the chicks eventually hatched, cracking the shells one by one, she noticed that one was different. They were all cute and lovely, but one was different She looked at it again and again, but could not find any resemblance with the others. Her heart filled with compassion and took pity on it.

‘It grows up with the others,’ she said to herself. What was the difference apart from its short legs and beak? She could not throw it away. It would surely die and a soul would be lost. This poor chick would never survive. She dared not mention it to her proud and handsome mate.

As the chicks grew, the differences became more apparent. The male had not noticed at first and used to watch them all with great pride. Then, one day, he noticed the duckling. Everything changed. He frowned and became angry. He stared at his wife fluffing out his feathers. She understood what this meant and what he was thinking. She shrunk away and was unable to make a sound. She wanted to say ‘I pitied this chick and wanted to protect it.’ but she couldn’t.

The male stork fluttered his wings, rose, and came down on his wife violently this was an infidelity and an insult to himself and his generation. He could not bear it. He could not ignore it. He did not care that the others were not jealous. He was extremely jealous and very angry. Although he loved his wife a great deal, his jealousy turned to hate. A female is beautiful and beloved if she protects the honour of the male. As he struck her, his beak filled with her feathers. She would never leave the chick. She was a mother. She could never do such a thing. He struck her again, more violently this time. Her body bled. With the third blow she looked at her chicks, as if seeking help, but they could not understand what was happening.

He flew away to seek the views of the other storks. They decided. An unfaithful female has to be executed. She made no sound. She was at the mercy of the law. He got his revenge. They took her body to the village square and dropped it there as a kind of warning. The dead stork became a play thing for the children.

The man who had swapped the egg saw it. Now, he wasn’t laughing. A flame burnt inside. He felt a heaviness on his heart. It wouldn’t go away. He took to drink and couldn’t talk to his family. He was overcome by embarrassment at the way he boasted in the coffee house. The villagers became sad upon hearing the yelling of the chicks in the high chimney. No adult dared touch the corpse. The village felt sorry for its guest, but no one would remove her body

The cruel man could not leave his house. He pulled the curtains and took refuge in darkness. The pangs of conscience exhausted him. He could only go outside in the evenings. One night, with a bottle in his hand, he went to the village square. He was talking to himself. The beak of the stork stood upright like a knife. In his drunkard state he lost his balance and fell on it. The beak pierced his heart.